You are seeing both the menu box and the box "Tap here for MENU" because your browser does not support Javascript. Normally only one of those would display depending upon your screen size.

Why are Muslim majority countries more corrupt?

Summary

Muslim majority countries cluster towards the bottom of the Transparence International corruption index.

Poverty is one part of the explanation.

I believe that outdated theories of "Islamic governance" are also an important reason.

22 June 2010

Transparency International is a global non-governmental organisation which fights corruption. It was founded in 1993. As a sign of its importance when Jermyn Brooks, chairman of Price Waterhouse Europe retired in the mid-1990s, he chose to become a director of Transparency International.

Each year Transparency International publishes its Corruption Perceptions Index which measures the perceived level of public sector corruption in the 178 countries around the world. This index is held in great respect by the media, international organisations and governments.

For many years I have been loosely conscious that Muslim majority countries clustered in the bottom half of the index; the lower a country ranks the greater the perceived level of public sector corruption. When writing this page, I decided to look at the matter systematically.

The Transparency International 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index

I have copied below the 2010 index and highlighted those countries which are members of The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The members of the OIC do not all have majority Muslim populations; in some cases the country has a significant Muslim minority but has chosen to join the OIC to reflect the wishes of its citizens. However the 57 member countries of the OIC are the most readily available indicator of the "Muslim World."

In the table below only 55 countries are highlighted. The reason is that two members of the OIC, Suriname and Palestine are not included in the Transparency International table.

Rank

Country

CPI 2010 Score

1

Denmark

9.3

2

New Zealand

9.3

3

Singapore

9.3

4

Finland

9.2

5

Sweden

9.2

6

Canada

8.9

7

Netherlands

8.8

8

Australia

8.7

9

Switzerland

8.7

10

Norway

8.6

11

Iceland

8.5

12

Luxembourg

8.5

13

Hong Kong

8.4

14

Ireland

8.0

15

Austria

7.9

16

Germany

7.9

17

Barbados

7.8

18

Japan

7.8

19

Qatar

7.7

20

United Kingdom

7.6

21

Chile

7.2

22

Belgium

7.1

23

United States

7.1

24

Uruguay

6.9

25

France

6.8

26

Estonia

6.5

27

Slovenia

6.4

28

Cyprus

6.3

29

United Arab Emirates

6.3

30

Israel

6.1

31

Spain

6.1

32

Portugal

6.0

33

Botswana

5.8

34

Puerto Rico

5.8

35

Taiwan

5.8

36

Bhutan

5.7

37

Malta

5.6

38

Brunei

5.5

39

Korea (South)

5.4

40

Mauritius

5.4

41

Costa Rica

5.3

42

Oman

5.3

43

Poland

5.3

44

Dominica

5.2

45

Cape Verde

5.1

46

Lithuania

5.0

47

Macau

5.0

48

Bahrain

4.9

49

Seychelles

4.8

50

Hungary

4.7

51

Jordan

4.7

52

Saudi Arabia

4.7

53

Czech Republic

4.6

54

Kuwait

4.5

55

South Africa

4.5

56

Malaysia

4.4

57

Namibia

4.4

58

Turkey

4.4

59

Latvia

4.3

60

Slovakia

4.3

61

Tunisia

4.3

62

Croatia

4.1

63

FYR Macedonia

4.1

64

Ghana

4.1

65

Samoa

4.1

66

Rwanda

4.0

67

Italy

3.9

68

Georgia

3.8

69

Brazil

3.7

70

Cuba

3.7

71

Montenegro

3.7

72

Romania

3.7

73

Bulgaria

3.6

74

El Salvador

3.6

75

Panama

3.6

76

Trinidad and Tobago

3.6

77

Vanuatu

3.6

78

China

3.5

79

Colombia

3.5

80

Greece

3.5

81

Lesotho

3.5

82

Peru

3.5

83

Serbia

3.5

84

Thailand

3.5

85

Malawi

3.4

86

Morocco

3.4

87

Albania

3.3

88

India

3.3

89

Jamaica

3.3

90

Liberia

3.3

91

Bosnia and Herzegovina

3.2

92

Djibouti

3.2

93

Gambia

3.2

94

Guatemala

3.2

95

Kiribati

3.2

96

Sri Lanka

3.2

97

Swaziland

3.2

98

Burkina Faso

3.1

99

Egypt

3.1

100

Mexico

3.1

101

Dominican Republic

3.0

102

Sao Tome and Principe

3.0

103

Tonga

3.0

104

Zambia

3.0

105

Algeria

2.9

106

Argentina

2.9

107

Kazakhstan

2.9

108

Moldova

2.9

109

Senegal

2.9

110

Benin

2.8

111

Bolivia

2.8

112

Gabon

2.8

113

Indonesia

2.8

114

Kosovo

2.8

115

Solomon Islands

2.8

116

Ethiopia

2.7

117

Guyana

2.7

118

Mali

2.7

119

Mongolia

2.7

120

Mozambique

2.7

121

Tanzania

2.7

122

Vietnam

2.7

123

Armenia

2.6

124

Eritrea

2.6

125

Madagascar

2.6

126

Niger

2.6

127

Belarus

2.5

128

Ecuador

2.5

129

Lebanon

2.5

130

Nicaragua

2.5

131

Syria

2.5

132

Timor-Leste

2.5

133

Uganda

2.5

134

Azerbaijan

2.4

135

Bangladesh

2.4

136

Honduras

2.4

137

Nigeria

2.4

138

Philippines

2.4

139

Sierra Leone

2.4

140

Togo

2.4

141

Ukraine

2.4

142

Zimbabwe

2.4

143

Maldives

2.3

144

Mauritania

2.3

145

Pakistan

2.3

146

Cameroon

2.2

147

Côte d´Ivoire

2.2

148

Haiti

2.2

149

Iran

2.2

150

Libya

2.2

151

Nepal

2.2

152

Paraguay

2.2

153

Yemen

2.2

154

Cambodia

2.1

155

Central African Republic

2.1

156

Comoros

2.1

157

Congo-Brazzaville

2.1

158

Guinea-Bissau

2.1

159

Kenya

2.1

160

Laos

2.1

161

Papua New Guinea

2.1

162

Russia

2.1

163

Tajikistan

2.1

164

Democratic Republic of Congo

2.0

165

Guinea

2.0

166

Kyrgyzstan

2.0

167

Venezuela

2.0

168

Angola

1.9

169

Equatorial Guinea

1.9

170

Burundi

1.8

171

Chad

1.7

172

Sudan

1.6

173

Turkmenistan

1.6

174

Uzbekistan

1.6

175

Iraq

1.5

176

Afghanistan

1.4

177

Myanmar

1.4

178

Somalia

1.1

Why are OIC countries placed low in the table?

One relevant factor is that poorer countries generally have lower rankings in this table than richer countries. However that is not universally true; for example Russia is listed at 162 despite being relatively wealthy. Many OIC members are poor countries.

However, looking at the OIC countries, a number (primarily oil producing countries) have relatively high levels of income per capita while still ranking relatively low on the corruption table. Overall, I believe that income levels are not the sole explanation for the low ranking of OIC countries. There must be another reason apart from income why OIC countries are lowly ranked. In my view the explanation derives from philosophies of governance.

Governance philosophies

This short page can only touch briefly upon philosophies of governance.

Ever since the rise of Christianity, monarchs and emperors in Christian majority countries have sought to link their power with divine authority and the religious hierarchies. This is commonly referred to as "the divine right of kings." Over the last 600 years societies in Christian majority countries have steadily whittled away or removed any concept of divine authority from their rulers. Instead the almost universal governance model is that the ruler derives his authority solely from the people and can be removed by the people. Furthermore the detailed governance structures are predicated on the assumption that people who are given power are prone to misbehave and therefore need to be watched closely with appropriate checks and balances. This is best summarised by Lord Acton's dictum "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

As an illustration, Barack Obama as president of the United States of America may be the most powerful man in the world but he has no ability to raise his own salary. There are also many mechanisms in place to prevent him employing his relatives at the expense of the United States taxpayer!

There has been relatively little development of the theory of governance by Muslims in view of the general stagnation of Islamic thought for about 500 years. As an illustration, when Umer Chapra wanted to write about government he had to rely upon the works of Ibn Khaldun written many centuries ago. Furthermore many Muslims still look back to the time of the Prophet (pbuh) and the rightly guided caliphs (the first four caliphs after the Prophet (pbuh)) for ideas about how government should be organised. Unfortunately the governance model they derive is to seek a morally perfect individual and then give him (never her!) absolute power. This model underlies the concept of the Supreme Leader in Iran. Unfortunately this Islamic governance model must lead inevitably to bad government as morally perfect individuals rarely exist, and as Lord Acton pointed out even good people are corrupted by power.

OIC countries will only improve their corruption performance when they recognise that the purpose of any system of government is to enable the people to choose their leaders, to limit the power of those leaders, to monitor the performance of those leaders and to remove them when the people wish.

The Disqus comments facility below allows you to comment on this page. Please respect others when commenting.
You can login using any of your Twitter, Facebook, Google+ or Disqus identities.
Even if you are not registered on any of these, you can still post a comment.

This page previously used Facebook comments. The comments received while that facility was in use have been preserved as the image below. For any new comments, please use the Disqus comments facility above.

Everything on this site, other than comments made using the comments facility, is written by me in a personal capacity and should not be attributed to any organisation with which I may be associated. None of it constitutes professional advice, and no legal responsibility is accepted to anyone who acts, or refrains from acting, as a result of reading or watching anything posted on this site.

Comments made on this site using the comments facility are the responsibility of the individual comment authors. If you consider that any comment defames you, please email Mohammed Amin using the facility on the "Contact me" page, specifying the page, the comment author and the date and time of the comment, and the reasons it is defamatory so that the comment can be removed.

The ownership of this site is stated on the "Legal" page. Mohammed Amin is a participant in the Amazon EU Associates Programme, an affiliate advertising programme designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.co.uk.